Ferocious Aardvark wrote:Look, he is convinced that all hundreds of thousands of scientists are all wrong, and he knows better. There is nothing whatsoever that you could say to shake his mad conviction 1 mm. It is a waste of time. Any query is either dismissed with insults, or occasionally some garbled insane riposte.
Some moons back, I asked him a simple question - Why does the moon look upside down when viewed from Australia?". I did so in the hope that actually thinking about that rather simple conundrum would help lead him maybe a step away from his blind certainty. For ages, he refused to answer and eventually came up with a puerile example about the word "perspective" and a crescent lamp viewed from opposite ends of a room. A but like those infuriatingly stupid pseudo-science vids he swallows whole, and is so fond of linking to, but a factor or two more risible and pathetic.
And then he blocked me, because even such a simple question is delusionally perceived as some sort of stalking, unfair, attack. It's not. It's a simple question, with no baggage. But his brain can't accept that, the answer doesn't compute but his delusions convince him that cannot be the case, and so it must be the question that is at fault.
If he can't even understand such a simple critique, what is the point of talking about anything with such a person?
Your question is as simple as "if the earth is flat, why do things appear gradually over the horizon"
Joined: Dec 05 2001 Posts: 25122 Location: Aleph Green
The earth does not have a "shape". It is a chaotically defined irregular object which is in a constant state of flux.
Describing it as "spherical" is as wrong as claiming it is flat.
That said, because of human cognitive limitations and relative scale we intuitively perceive it as flat even when we know it to be otherwise. It's the reason maps are rendered in two dimensions despite the fact that such are patently inaccurate and misleading.
And this is before I've even begun to talk about what form earth might take in the dizzying geometries of purported higher dimensions.
It's completely irrational to waste your time arguing about hopelessly imprecise labels.
If we suddenly discovered the earth is as flat as a snooker table (a decent metaphor and yet still a bad definition of "flat") what difference would it make? Would GPS satellites immediately cease to function?
For thousands of years humans were certain that the earth was flat. Did they change in any appreciable way when they were informed that it isn't?
I mean, I can't force you to desist chipping your IQs down to double figures but I really wish you'd invest your energies in matters that ... well ... matter.
Joined: Dec 05 2001 Posts: 25122 Location: Aleph Green
King Street Cat wrote:Like trying to find out who really shot JFK over half a century ago eh Mugwump?
Well, we could ponder the meaning of your miserable excuse for a life. Although I'm guessing few would wish to squelch into that quagmire of bitterness and self-loathing.
Joined: May 24 2007 Posts: 7504 Location: East Stand
Mugwump wrote:Well, we could ponder the meaning of your miserable excuse for a life. Although I'm guessing few would wish to squelch into that quagmire of bitterness and self-loathing.
Pillock
Did you get rid of all the voices in your head? Do you now miss them and the things that they said?
Joined: Jun 19 2002 Posts: 14970 Location: Campaigning for a deep attacking line
I would say the earth is a hell of a lot closer to being spherical than it is to being flat.
If we're going to be pedantic then nothing is perfectly spherical and nothing is perfectly flat. I think most people can see the general idea behind the use of such terms though.
As for JFK, I agree with Charlie Sheen. I think it does matter who shot him and why. Maybe the identities of the people who physically pulled the triggers aren't that important, but the people who organised it are. In the same way as the actual reasons for going into Iraq are important. They're about as important issues as you can get in my opinion. They're about our entire way of life.
Which is why I don't believe every conspiracy that's floated but nor do I automatically discredit such thoughts.
We know governments do secret things and can pull off secretive events. We know that the media is corrupt, in the sense of it doesn't just present with unbiased facts and information. It puts its own slant on it and selects facts and information it likes and ignores facts and information it doesn't like.
So I don't blindly trust official sources of the media any more than I would trust Flat Stanley. They're both bullsh|tters. I look at a situation and decide whether it adds up. I try and find the other side of the story. I urge people to watch RT news channel occasionally, especially at the moment with the confrontation with the Russians. Again, don't believe it anymore or less than you would Sky News or the BBC, but it presents a different side to issues and often information that isn't presented to you by the regular media. Look at all sides, look at as much evidence and information as possible and then think about it for a while.
In the case of JFK anyone who does that HAS to come to the conclusion that SOMETHING is wrong, even if you don't agree with various theories about it. The same goes for me with 9/11 and at least parts of Sandy Hook though I've only seen bits on that so far.
I'm struggling to think of 2 bigger events since the end of the 2nd World War than JFK and 9/11. They both radically changed the world we live in both in a macro and micro sense. If, if it turns out those 2 events aren't how we've been told, then I think that's very very important and very relevant to myself and my family.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 118 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
